JeffCroft.com

12.02.2007 // 4 CommentsKU to play Virginia Tech in Orange Bowl

Comments

1. 001 // James Asher // 12.03.2007 // 11:12 AM

   KU is still an overrated team. The fact is, they got into the Orange bowl solely because of their record and not because they’re a better team than Missouri.

   Frankly, I don’t particularly care about either team, but Missouri is still the better of the two.

2. 002 // Jeff Croft // 12.03.2007 // 11:47 AM

   I won’t argue with that at all. At this point, MU appears to be the better team (if KU beats Tech in the Orange Bowl, I think they’d make a case for the Jayhawks being better). But, as everyone knows, the BCS doesn’t even try to put the best teams in their bowls (except for the National Championship game).

   MU may have a reason to be upset (with two teams they beat in BCS bowls and them not), but the fact remains that they played themselves out. They had a chance to go to the national title game, and failed.KU also had a chance to go to the national title game (by beating MU, and then OU), and they failed, too. Both teams played themselves out of a national title game bid and put their fates into the hands of at-large selections into the other bowls, which is a total crapshoot.

3. 003 // Eric Cast // 12.05.2007 // 2:54 PM

   11-1 is not better than 11-2 if you are comparing MU’s record and KU’s record (which you are) because of the schedules. I know all KU fans are tired of hearing about the “weak” schedule they played, but it’s true. Teams KU and MU both played (eg. colorado) MU looked better, not to mention the head to head match which MU was DOMINATING until they went into a more conservative defense towards the end of the game and KU just took advantage of that, kudos. I believe KU is definantly a top 10 team, but MU can beat them in Lawrence or anywhere this year… way more talent on the black and gold side.

4. 004 // Jeff Croft // 12.05.2007 // 3:04 PM

   Eric, I think you missed my point — and the point of the BCS system.

   I never claimed (nor do I believe) that KU is a better team than Mizzou. I believe Mizzou is better. But, that doesn’t change the fact that KU has a better record, which looks sexier to a Bowl choosing at at-large team.

   And the fact that it’s an at-large team is very important. These Bowls have no obligation to choose the best teams for at-large selections. Anyone who thinks the other” BCS Bowls (i.e. the ones besides the National Championship game) are the best teams in the land simply doesn’t understand how the system works.

   But more to your point: I do think MU is a better team than KU. However, I am tired of hearing about the weak schedule. KU has been a bad team for a long time. I don’t blame Mangino one bit for scheduling weak non-conference opponents. No one, including KU, knew they would be this good this year. And, while KU’s Big XII schedule was certainly weak, that’s not KU’s fault at all (they didn’t choose it). But, more importantly: KU not only beat every team they played (Mizzou excepted, of course), but they beat them soundly. They beat them like a good team should beat a weak team. KU did everything they were supposed to do, as the 8th-ranked team in the nation: they beat everyone they were favored against very soundly (including some flat-out beatdowns), and they lost a relatively close game to a team that is ranked higher than them. In other words, they performed exactly up to expectations, based on their final ranking. I’d say their final ranking is just about right. Mizzou’s probably is, too.

   Given that (KU is 8th and Mizzou is 6th), you would expect both to be in BCS bowls, if you mistakenly believe that the BCS bowls pit the best teams against each other. But they don’t, and that’s why KU is in and Mizzou isn’t.

© 1999-2008 Jeffrey A. Croft. Hosted by WebFaction.
Views expressed are not necessarily those of my employer.